astroway-mcp

Official

by astroway

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Dashas: Shatabdika Mahadasha

astroway_vedic_dashas_shatabdika_maha

Read-onlyIdempotent

Computes the Shatabdika 100-year nakshatra mahadasha periods from birth data, giving Vedic astrologers the planetary timeline for timing predictions.

Instructions

Shatabdika Dasha: 100-year nakshatra dasha cycle (BPHS Adhyaya 46 group). 7 planets (no shadow planets), seed nakshatra = Revati (27). Sequence: Sun(5)→Moon(5)→Venus(10)→Mercury(10)→Jupiter(20)→Mars(20)→Saturn(30). Distribution: 6 planets get 4 nakshatras each, Saturn gets 3. Standard nakshatra-fraction × period balance rule. Algorithm port of PyJHora sataatbika.py.

[Group: Vedic] [Endpoint: POST /v1/vedic/dashas/shatabdika/maha] [Cost: 20 credits (Tier 2)]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`body`	Yes	Birth data for a single natal chart. Required: date (YYYY-MM-DD), time (HH:mm:ss), latitude and longitude in decimal degrees. The short forms lat, lon, lng and tz are rejected with 400 INVALID_FIELD; pass the full names. timezoneOffset is hours from UTC and defaults to 0, meaning UTC; send timezone instead (an IANA name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto) and the offset for that date is worked out, summer time included. city is a display label only: nothing here geocodes it, so it never stands in for coordinates. houseSystem is a single Swiss Ephemeris letter, P by default; a name such as "Placidus" is refused, and the case matters because I and i are two different Sunshine systems.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`level`	No
`system`	No
`initial`	No
`periods`	No
`ayanamsa`	No
`nakshatra`	No
`moonSiderealLongitude`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.6.0Oct 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so safety is covered; the description adds that this is a deterministic algorithm port of PyJHora's sataatbika.py with a fixed seed nakshatra (Revati) and fixed period allocations, letting an agent anticipate output structure. It also discloses the 20-credit Tier 2 cost, which matters for call budgeting.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence front-loads the identity and scope, then the sequence and distribution details follow in tight, non-redundant form. Metadata lines are compact and useful; nothing is filler, though the rule detail is dense for a description.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the annotations plus rich body schema cover safety and inputs. What is missing is level disambiguation (maha vs antar) against its closest siblings — the one thing an agent still has to infer.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the body schema documents date/time/latitude/longitude, timezone, ayanamsa and house system in detail, so the description correctly relies on it. The description adds no param-level guidance of its own, such as whether ayanamsa choice affects the seed nakshatra — baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the specific technique (Shatabdika Dasha, 100-year nakshatra cycle, BPHS Adhyaya 46) and details its planetary sequence and nakshatra distribution, so an agent knows exactly which dasha system this computes. It does not, however, distinguish the 'maha' (top-level) level from its four shatabdika siblings (antar/pratyantar/sookshma/prana) or from other dasha systems such as vimshottari and yogini, which share the same input shape.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description states what the dasha is but never says when to choose it over vimshottari, yogini, ashtottari or the shatabdika sub-period tools, nor which question types it answers. Only the metadata lines ([Group: Vedic], endpoint, cost) imply usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server